Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fee Schedule Trash topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
La Plata council adopts FY2026 fee schedule including new trash pricing after heated debate
Summary
The La Plata Town Council on May 27 adopted Ordinance 25-04, the FY2026 fee schedule, including revised residential and commercial trash rates and a per-additional-can charge. The vote was 3–2 after extended discussion about equity, implementation and the town running a projected shortfall on the service.
Get email alerts on the Fee Schedule Trash topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The La Plata Town Council on May 27 adopted Ordinance 25-04 (FY2026 fee schedule) after lengthy debate about trash collection, rates and enforcement. The ordinance changes the town's fee schedule to raise residential rates and set higher charges for additional cans; the motion passed on a 3–2 roll-call vote.
The vote followed a sustained discussion among council members, the acting town manager and public works staff about implementation and financial impact. Councilman Paul Guttenberg, Councilman Taejon Johnson and Mayor Janine James voted in favor; Councilman Patrick McCormick and Councilman Gregory Sampson voted no. The council clerk recorded the outcome: yes 3, no 2.
Council members and staff framed the measure as an attempt to make trash service more equitable while limiting a growing subsidy the town has been carrying for collection. Acting Town Manager Minor and Director of Finance Ms. Larson described the fee schedule as returning some of the cost of service to ratepayers while noting that the proposal still left the service “in the red” by an estimated amount discussed during the meeting. Director of Public Works (Mr. Cox) warned the council that one of the largest implementation challenges would be refusing to pick up materials not placed in town-issued cans; he said that step was likely to generate citizen complaints and operational pushback.
Council members pressed staff on the size of the shortfall and operational risk. Ms. Larson told the council the proposed fee adjustments would reduce the projected service deficit but not eliminate it immediately; remaining costs would be covered from fund balance unless additional savings are found. During discussion, members debated whether to raise rates across the board (an 8% increase was discussed) or to keep a smaller, targeted increase and a per-additional-can charge—council ultimately approved the smaller-scale plan with the higher per-can fee.
Opponents said the change would be painful for some households and questioned whether the town has sufficient enforcement capacity to collect only town-can trash. Councilman McCormick said he was “concerned with this fee schedule” and worried it would cause “pain and heartache” when residents see the first bill. Supporters argued a modest, targeted increase affects fewer households than a blanket 8% rise and that clearer enforcement and communication could control costs.
The council and staff discussed practical steps for rollout and communication. Public Works staff reported frequent instances of crews collecting non-town cans and said this practice has contributed to higher disposal costs. Staff said they will develop messaging and operational guidance to residents about the change; the council did not adopt a formal suspension or phase-in policy at the meeting.
With the ordinance adopted, staff will implement the new fees as written in the FY2026 fee schedule. The council discussion made clear the town plans to monitor collection patterns and may return to the council if the projected shortfall persists or if operational problems emerge.

